期刊文献+
任意字段
题名或关键词
题名
关键词
摘要
作者
第一作者
机构
刊名
分类号
参考文献
作者简介
基金资助
栏目信息
共找到1篇文章
< 1 >
每页显示 20 50 100
已选0条
引用分析
参考文献
引证文献
 统计分析
检索结果
已选文献
显示方式：
Assessing Large Language Models for Early Article Identification in Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Systematic Reviews 认领 引用
1
作者 Ajibola B.Bakare Young Lee +2 位作者 Jhuree Hong Claus-Peter Richter Jonathan P.Kuriakose 《Health Care Science》 CSCD 2026年第1期19-28,共10页
Background:Assess ChatGPT and Bard's effectiveness in the initial identification of articles for Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery systematic literature reviews.Methods:Three PRISMA-based systematic reviews(Ja... Background:Assess ChatGPT and Bard's effectiveness in the initial identification of articles for Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery systematic literature reviews.Methods:Three PRISMA-based systematic reviews(Jabbour et al.2017,Wong et al.2018,and Wu et al.2021)were replicated using ChatGPTv3.5 and Bard.Outputs(author,title,publication year,and journal)were compared to the original references and cross-referenced with medical databases for authenticity and recall.Results:Several themes emerged when comparing Bard and ChatGPT across the three reviews.Bard generated more outputs and had greater recall in Wong et al.'s review,with a broader date range in Jabbour et al.'s review.In Wu et al.'s review,ChatGPT-2 had higher recall and identified more authentic outputs than Bard-2.Conclusion:Large language models(LLMs)failed to fully replicate peer-reviewed methodologies,producing outputs with inaccuracies but identifying relevant,especially recent,articles missed by the references.While human-led PRISMA-based reviews remain the gold standard,refining LLMs for literature reviews shows potential. 展开更多
关键词 artificial intelligence Bard ChatGPT large language models systematic review
暂未订购 下载PDF
已选0条
引用分析
参考文献
引证文献
 统计分析
检索结果
已选文献
上一页 1 下一页 到第 页
在线咨询 使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈